Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Susan Clayton's avatar

Louis Cozolino ((The Social Neuroscience of Education) states: relationships are humanity's habitat. We are born because of a relationship; we are raised through relationships; and we know, for a fact, that relationships can 'make us or break us'.

I agree with Joel, Will you are on a 'fruitful path'. This conversation is long over due in my opinion.

Relationships in school have been problematic for decades because they have been/are based on an authoritarian model; a built-in power imbalance. It did not work for me - I was 'done' 6 weeks into grade 1 and I knew I was not alone. It would be many more years before I grasped that teachers do not see their learners in this model, especially when the learner is struggling - particularly if the problem is social, emotional. I am wondering if shifting the view from "reconstruction" to "new construction" - a balanced model of relationships - would be helpful?

Relationships are messy; not quantifiable for a mark on a report card and as such, left to languish under the 'heel' of accountability - the focus is on, as you note Joel and Will, performance - time-bound, impersonal and the kids are correct: meaningless work.

The irony of schooling: learning is a natural human pursuit, done in the 'container' of human

relationships. Only in the habitat of human relationships will learning in school find meaning, purpose, joy and fun. Learning with others feeds the soul.

A few older books (but still useful) on this topic:

"The Social Neuroscience of Education" - Cozolino

"The Courage to Teach" - Palmer (relationships with ideas)

"Curriculum in Abundance" - Jardine (nurturing the learners' relationships with ideas)

"Reclaiming Youth at Risk" - Brendtro, Brokenleg, Van Bockern (repairing relationships)

Newer books:

"Emotions, Learning and the Brain" Immordino-Yang

"Reader Come Home" M Wolfe

I I have not read "Burnout from Humans" but I have certainly experienced the title on numerous occasions over what has become my long life. Too much (of anything) is part of life. It is an uncomfortable, disconcerting and at times ugly piece of living in human relationships. And because as a society we do not talk about the hard parts of relationships (and we have so many opportunities in school to do this via a third point reference - e.g. Shakespeare) we don't know what to do to work through stuff like "burnout" - and equally important, recognize the signs of burnout and deal with it before it is too late. But all of this requires knowledge and skills that most children, youth and adults do not have.

In my opinion, without meaningful human relationships in our family, school, and community it is very difficult to have meaningful, joyful relationships with ideas and in particular with nature.

Expand full comment
Joel Backon's avatar

Will, you’re on a fruitful path with the reconstruction of relationships in schools. The energy that comes from interacting with others, our ecosystem, and ideas has been replaced by a digital connection that is either on or off in rapid sequence. To a human, that looks like an emotional void. We don’t benefit from the pathway; only the destinations. If a given destination is disappointing, there is nothing left to reverse that disappointment so we simply go on to the next destinations until we find one that feels good. Some people call that process “scrolling.”

Human interaction through relationships is far more powerful and activates more of our selves because we view words, emotions, and visual impressions through the series of narratives that are somewhat unique to each of us. That can’t be duplicated in the digital world because the experiences are charged with emotion. AI falls short in this realm because it cannot “feel” the experiences, but only chronicle them. The journey only has value as a reference for the destinations.

You’re right. Schools have evolved into repositories for conditioning students to perform better in the mastery of specific and measurable skills and recall of information. The process is time-bound so relationships that take time to nurture don’t fit. A few teachers manage to transcend the closed system and truly help a few kids, but most do not or cannot.

Yesterday, I commented on LI about Ira Socol’s book, Timeless Learning. I wrote, “ Ira, I read your book when it was originally published. It became one of my go-to sources when talking to teachers about changing schools. I remember your critical point about seeing children. That principle makes all the difference, as the "system" is focused on numbers that are a proxy for children. Thanks for sticking with the cause.”

You’ve found the “lever” that will start Frank Moretti’s boulder rolling (Dalton School and Columbia, 1990s). The answer to education reinvention was staring at us the entire time we have struggled with this difficult challenge.

Expand full comment
5 more comments...

No posts